Criminal Defence Service Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lords for participating in this short but extremely important debate. I say to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Ackner, that I am happy to be a part of any band of brothers—or sisters—that includes the noble and learned Lord and am extremely honoured to be thought of as such. I am also grateful for the principle about which noble Lords have spoken. There is an issue of great importance here that we are seeking to address; that is, to ensure that we use legal aid appropriately and, in particular circumstances outlined within this Bill, that it is right and proper for those who are convicted and who are able to pay to do so. I am very grateful to those who have expressed those sentiments extremely well. The best approach to try and go through the points that noble Lords have raised and address as many as I can now, with the proviso I always give—that those issues I fail to address will be dealt with in correspondence between now and Committee stage. The noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, started by asking why the Secretary of State and not the Lord Chancellor is involved. I have an answer to that question, which is that apparently the Bill has to follow the Access to Justice Act as it stands now, not as it may or will be amended by the Constitutional Reform Act, when it comes into force. Apparently that means that we have to use that particular phraseology. The noble Lord looks suitably bemused, but that is the answer I have. If there is anything wrong with that answer I will, of course, write to him but I cannot give him anything more than that.